Brizendine v. Conrad

David Brizendine (plaintiff) leased an apartment building to Nora Conrad (defendant), intending she would purchase it at the end of a 12-month term; the lease required a $15,000 payment creditable toward purchase, obligated Conrad to maintain the property and return it in the same condition (minus normal wear and tear) if she didn't buy, and stated the $15,000 would be retained as liquidated damages if she failed to meet her lease obligations. When Conrad declined to purchase, Brizendine found roughly $30,000 in damage beyond normal wear and tear; rather than repair it, he sold to a new buyer and sued Conrad for statutory waste, and Conrad argued the liquidated-damages clause was a special license permitting her to cause such damage. The trial court awarded waste damages, trebled under the statute to roughly $33,000, and Conrad appealed.